Contemporary Issues and Challenges in the Workplace - Research Paper Example

Management of the non-profit organizations: What are some of the greatest challenges facing human resources managers in the realm of employee engagement? Abstract The proposed dissertation intends to determine how employee engagement is being undertaken among non-profit organisations, and the challenges faced by human resources managers in NPOs. There is an inherent difference in the manner the workforce is motivated in the conventional business organization, from that in non-profit organizations. The former is operated to realize economic gain, which is likewise reflected in the personal goals and incentives the company offers its employees. NPOs, on the other hand, do not usually provide for substantial monetary compensation, since most, if not all, of its work force are volunteers. As such, workers are motivated more by their love and dedication to the mission of the organization and the cause for which it stands. Because of this fundamental difference, workers in NPOs cannot be persuaded to remain with the organisation and contribute their best by the usual means of increasing pay and monetary incentives. Although volunteers are drawn to the job because of the psychic income, such may not be sufficient to sustain the commitment of these volunteers in the long term, without the necessary and appropriate support and action by the human resources manager. The threats posed by the social and physical environment on the continued commitment of an NPO’s volunteer staff will remain a source of challenge to its HR managers, which this dissertation shall aim to explore. Introduction Not too long ago, there was a clear dichotomy of organizations according to their nature and purpose. The common taxonomy of organizations distinguished them according to whether they were business corporations, organizations supporting philanthropic causes or social development purposes, or public administrative organizations. Business organizations worked to maximize profit, public administrative organizations advanced the goals of the government, and the social cause-oriented organizations worked towards the development of marginalized sectors of society. Recently, there has emerged a changing trend in how organizations are expected to operate. Business organizations can no longer be motivated by the single goal of realizing profits; it must actively pursue a corporate social responsibility program and sustainability program integrally with its main operations, in order to return to society a portion of its profits for the benefits it enjoys as corporate citizen. Non-profit organizations, on the other hand, are compelled to face the necessity of operating on a self-sustaining basis; it can no longer rely on its previous sponsors and donors who had so generously supported it during more prosperous times, because of the deep financial crisis that will continue to defy recovery efforts for some time to come. Even as many business organizations have been forced to close, NPOs, because of their less financially tenable position, are forced to face economic realities and find ways and means to become financially self-sustaining. There are implications to the obscuring delineations between the types of organizations. Business organizations are becoming increasingly socially oriented, while NPOs are assuming activities that are increasingly economic. These affect the manner in which human resources are expected to perform and how they are engaged. Conceptual framework The term employee engagement may immediately be considered a misnomer in the sense that NPO workers are mostly volunteers rather than employees. As such, they are normally not bound by an employment contract where they commit to discharge a particular set of duties in exchange for a predefined monetary compensation. NPO workers perform their duties of their own accord and volition, and correspondingly excel in these duties out of a sense of dedication to further the cause of the organization. Granted that there exists already a greater affinity and identity between the personal goals of the NPO volunteer and the NPO, in comparison to the employee and the business corporation, there is still a need to further intensify this incipient engagement particularly for volunteers who, by virtue of their exceptional skills and knowledge, have much to offer to the NPO’s success. For this reason, this study resorts to a conceptual framework arrived at by Sahoo, Behera and Tripathy (2010) which treats on the drivers of engagement, in terms of drivers of empowerment and drivers of employee (worker) involvement. The framework also takes into account the evident results of employee engagement, in terms of workplace commitment (resolved her into two components, organizational and individual commitment). From Sahoo, Behera & Tripathy (2010) Details of workplace commitment: In the conceptual framework, there are two principal sets of factors: the antecedent factors in terms of drivers of empowerment, the intermediate factors in terms of drivers of employee involvement, and the resultant factors in terms of workplace commitment, which are distinguished as organisational and individual commitment. Under drivers of empowerment, the factors therein named do not appear to be all applicable to NPOs in the same way they are in business organizations. One would note this particularly in the case of “reward and recognition” and “upward performance appraisal.” While these convey a different sense for the employee in a profit organization, they are not necessarily entirely inapplicable to the case of volunteers in an NPO setting. “Reward” may be taken to mean non-monetary, intrinsic, or psychic reward, while “recognition” may come in likewise gratuitous forms. Likewise, “upward performance appraisal” need not necessarily imply a promotion to a higher level with greater power and higher pay. It may be taken to connote a positive regard for one’s performance, for which that person may be asked to do work with greater responsibility and challenge. In the same manner, under drivers of employee involvement, “job enrichment” may be taken to mean task or work enrichment (as against paid jobs), “collective bargaining” may mean the practice of discussing work arrangements between managerial and rank-and-file groups, and “employee suggestions” would be volunteers’ suggestions. Finally, as a result of workplace commitment, the desired outcomes of engagement should be discernible, namely emotional attachment, team performance, group cohesiveness, better individual performance, higher satisfaction, and intrinsic motivation. Need for the study The study of the application of employee engagement in non-profit organizations has become an important area of study. It is a novel twist to the traditional study of employee engagement in business corporations. For businesses, it is undoubtedly important to seek to engage, motivate, and retain employees because of the market for employment which tend to attract the talented, skilled, knowledgeable, and exceptional employees to competitor firms or jobs. The need to forge a common identity with the firm is vital in the case of businesses, because normally the employee remain in his job until another one comes along that offers better pay, opportunities, and career or professional growth for him. In short, employees in businesses are quite fluid. On the other hand, traditionally when a volunteer joins a NPO it is almost always because he has found an affinity with the cause represented by the NPO. The shared identity is already forged from the start, for which reason he offers his services pro bono, just for the love of the work. One may say, a volunteer is already engaged in the NPO in so far as the cause it stands for is concerned. However, the long-term stay of the volunteer is an issue which should be addressed by human resources managers in NPOs. The non-profit organization has ceased to be a local community service or group. There are non-profit organizations which have spanned the globe, such as the Salvation Army, and those associations targeting people with special conditions such as the Special Olympics Movement. Affiliate groups in other countries band together, not for the purposes of creating profit and economies of scale, but in order to share expertise and spread the benefits to those persons similarly disadvantaged in other countries. Because of the need to sustain these NPOs which have grown and expanded, and because of the more complex demands of self-sustainability in a challenging economy, the NPO, like the business organization, must maintain and retain its most vital resource – its manpower – particularly the good workers with the work ethic, skills and knowledge to best discharge the work. “Worker” engagement has become a vital tool in keeping good people, even for NPOs. Statement of the Problem The study seeks to address the problem: What are the challenges faced by human resources managers in non-profit organizations, with respect to employee engagement? This presupposes two things: that employee engagement exists as a strategic HR tool currently implemented in non-profit organizations; and that human resources managers in NPOs face challenges in the use of this tool. In order to resolve the problem, the following research questions or sub-problems are going to be answered: 1. To what degree do drivers of empowerment exist in non-profit organizations? 2. To what degree to drivers of employee involvement exist in non-profit organisations? 3. Is there sufficient evidence of workplace commitment and its outcomes within the non-profit organizations? The questions are designed to specifically target those aspects and relationships among the factors which, if existing to a satisfactory degree in non-profit organizations, may lead to the desired outcomes, and where they are found not to exist sufficiently in the NPO, to discover those reasons why they are lacking. In making this discovery, the dissertation would have answered what challenges face the NPO’s HR management that may hinder the effective implementation of employee engagement, and recommend steps which may be taken to resolve these issues. Significance and Innovation of the Research The research is significant because it applies a conceptual framework designed for business organizations, in the setting of non-profit organizations, which, if successful, will probably be the first validation of the theory in a non-profit environment. The innovation introduced in the research is that it is one of only a relative few quantitative studies in the field of social research (which usually favours the use of the qualitative approach), and probably one of the first attempts to apply the Sahoo framework on non-profit organizations. Statement of the Purpose The purpose of the research is to explore the implications of employee engagement in non-performing organizations, and where hindrances exist, to suggest possible courses of action the NPO or NPOs may take in order to address the problems and make more effective the use of employee engagement in these organizations. Literature Review2,000 Following is a brief scan of the relevant academic literature on employee engagement theory and the application of employee engagement and motivation in non-profit organizations. The purpose of this review is to find out the existing theories that have been established by earlier studies, in order that this dissertation may be properly guided in new though well-founded directions. The studies reviewed have been drawn from the EBSCO search facility for academic and professional journals and publications. Employee Engagement Engaged employees have come to be recognized as assets to organisations, whether profit or non-profit. They are known for their optimism and upbeat attitude towards both their work and the organisation they work for. They are emotionally attached to their jobs and their organisation, are highly enthusiastic at their work, and will willingly perform above and beyond the mandate of their job description (Markos & Sridevi, 2010, p. 89). While many independent authors and HR practitioners generally agree on what an engaged employee is and does, a strict definition of “employee engagement” continues to elude human resource managers and academics. Employee engagement is described in many ways. It has been defined in terms of resources used, as “the extra time, brainpower, and energy that employees put toward their work that results in discretionary effort” (Johnson, 2011, p. 13). It is “the level of commitment and involvement an employee has towards their organisation and its values” (Sarkar, 2011, p. 62). Perrin’s Global Workforce Study (Witts, Ydreos & Poirier, 2008) presents the following illustration in support of its own definition of engagement. In this framework, employee engagement is circumscribed by three actions: (1) Think, referring to rational items, such as when employees believe strongly in the company’s goals and objectives; (2) Feel, which involves the emotional items, such as the feeling and inspiration engendered in the employees to do their best work for the sake of the organization; and (3) Act, or the motivation items, including the willingness of the individual employee to “put in a great deal of effort beyond what is normally expected to help his organization succeed (Witts, Ydreos & Poirier, 2008, p. 17). Framework for Employee Engagement Source: Witts, Ydreos & Poirier, 2008, p. 17 Aside from the way employees feel and act, employee engagement has likewise been closely linked to personal and organisational performance. How employees are pre-disposed to work is of no moment unless such sentiments bear results in the form of the advancement of organisational goals. Rashid, Asad and Ashraf (2011) proved that a net positive relationship exists between organisational productivity, particularly with the presence of significant factors including delegation of decision making, performance reward systems, performance appraisals, co-ordination training and career development (p. 104). Markos, et al. (2010) identified the drivers of employee engagement as including the following: in the lower levels these include pay and benefits, then a bit higher there are the opportunities for development, the possibilities of promotion, and leadership style; near the top are meaning at work, a shared and common purpose, and sense of connection, which are capable of bringing together employees in a sense of community (p. 91). In an earlier study, Robinson, Perryman & Hayday (2004) found that the key driver of engagement is “a sense of feeling valued and involved,” which is fostered by involvement in decision making, the extent to which employees feel able to voice their ideas, the opportunities employees are extended to develop their jobs, and the extent of organisational concern for employees’ health and well-being. Employee Engagement in Nonprofit Organizations. In the earlier mentioned studies of employee engagement, it was mentioned that pay, benefits and promotion were crucial factors that must first be fulfilled before the higher aspirations of belongingness and sense of community may begin. These studies were directed at organisations that were in business, the principal motive of which was to realize profits. There is likely to be a difference, therefore, in non-profit organizations which are not intensely concerned with making profits. Most of these organisations are manned by volunteers and persons who are more attached to the cause of the organisation than the advancement of their careers. There is therefore the possibility of a difference in employee engagement in non-profit vis-à-vis profit-oriented organisations. Kesler (2011) explored these comparisons and contrasts between profit and non-profit organizations. The article was anchored on Peter Drucker’s argument that the two types of organizations could learn from each other – business can learn from the passion of non-profit organizations for their mission, while non-profit organizations may find more effective outcomes to their efforts if they learn from the discipline of business. In Kesler’s interview with Tim Shriver, the CEO and chairman of Special Olympics International or SOI, they focused on the leadership style which best allowed for employee engagement and involvement in the Special Olympics “movement.” Shiver observed that non-profit organisations (NPOs) needed to cultivate the qualities found in business – the intellectual drive, operational skill, and commitment to the attainment of the desired results – and combine these with the intangibles of the workplace and the gratification compensation which NPOs already possessed. The old dichotomy of separating economic value from personal value, or distinguishing profit from purpose, is no longer relevant in present-day NPOs (p. 40). There are several crucial attributes which volunteers in NPOs possess which would be advantageous for workers in businesses to similarly imbibe. According to Drucker, volunteers worked for psychic rewards, for which they are internally compelled to give their best in their work. A culture which is built around volunteer behaviour is rooted in the love for and dedication to the mission. “People act because they believe something good will happen for others as a result of their effort” (Kesler, 2011, p. 44). Hardina and Montana (2011) conducted a national survey of social service managers. The survey respondents were polled on the management theories and models which greatly influenced their administrative styles and actions. The study found that many social services managers utilized management approaches oriented towards employee empowerment, and actively initiated management activities which were directed at engaging and empowering staff, and tended to downplay or at least pay relatively less attention to increase client involvement in the process of organisational or political decision-making. Methods Design The research design is based upon the positivist philosophy (as against the phenomenological philosophy of research). The positivist philosophy states that information that will be relevant in a research study will be measureable and quantifiable, and objectively observable without the need for subjective interpretation. This counters the phenomenological philosophy, which believes that the essential elements to be studied are contained in the subjective interpretation in the minds of people, rather than what may be externally sensed. Such interpretation is of course not quantifiable, but may only be represented by qualitative data. This dissertation intends to pursue the deductive rather than the inductive approach. The deductive approach starts off with a general theory that has already been established by the pool of academic literature, and to test the subject under study against the established theory. It is described as a top to bottom approach, because it commences with a generalization and ends with the specific results of the tests. On the other hand, the inductive method is called the bottom upward approach, where the researcher begins by making observations concerning what prevails in the environment, devising patterns that appear to suit the observations, and arriving at a general model or theory which may be applicable in other circumstances. Subjects or participants The survey questionnaire is to be distributed to 150 respondents, 50 from each of the organisational levels (rank and file, first line supervisory, and the higher management). The respondents shall be randomly selected from among the employees or volunteers in non-profit organisations. The respondents will be sent either soft or hard copies of the survey questionnaire, which they are to accomplish with the assurance of the confidentiality of their identities, and that their responses are to be used only for academic purposes. Instrument A copy of the survey questionnaire based on the theoretical framework of Sahoo, Behera, & Tripathy (2010) follows. The framework is comprised of the two sets of input factors – employee empowerment and employee involvement – and the output factor commitment, both individual and organisational. At the end of the dissertation, a space will be provided with an open-ended invitation for the respondent to write down his impressions of employee engagement in NPOs, its manner of application, its perceived effectiveness, and /or what problems may be addressed and how they may be addressed. The responses to the items are forced answers which the respondents are going to choose from. The answers are in levels or degrees to which the factor is present in the NPO. They are structured according to the five-point Likert scale, with 1 as the lowest rating and 5 as the highest level, by which respondent perception may be gauged. The results are then averaged for each group and according to each item, and these mean scores shall be compared to their counterpart scores in the other group, in order to gain an idea as to whether or not Profile of Respondent Please mark the box with your answer 1 Age of respondent: Below 18 years   19 to 30 years   31 to 45 years   46 to 60 years   Above 60 years   2 Gender: Male   Female   3 Education: Below secondary   Secondary or trade/craft   College degree   Masters or Doctorate   4 Length of stay with the company: Less than one year   Between 1 to 3 years   Between 3 to 10 years   Longer than 10 years   5 Position in company: Middle to top management   First-line supervisors   Rank and file   Respondents Perception Mark the box according to how you rate the factor in your organisation (1 - Lowest, 5 - Highest) Drivers of Employee Empowerment 1 2 3 4 5 6 Role clarity           7 Challenging job           8 Reward and recognition           9 Supportive leadership           10 Span of supervision           11 Realistic HR policies           12 Upward performance appraisal           13 Access to information and resources           14 Attitude of top management           Drivers of Employee Involvement 15 Job enrichment           16 Goal setting           17 Joint decision-making           18 Team effort           19 Collective bargaining           20 Employee suggestions           21 Periodic discussion with supervisor           22 Training and development           Workplace Commitment Mark the box according to how you rate the factor in your organisation (1 - Lowest, 5 - Highest) Components of Organisational Commitment 1 2 3 4 5 23 Supervisory commitment           24 Attitudinal commitment           25 Calculative commitment           Components of Individual Commitment 26 Team commitment           27 Job commitment           28 Career commitment           Outcomes 29 Emotional attachment           30 Team performance           31 Group cohesiveness           32 Better individual performance           33 Higher satisfaction           34 Intrinsic motivation           The space provided below has been reserved for any comments or reactions you may have regarding the degree of employee empowerment you experience in your non profit organization. Please feel free to enter them here. The confidentiality of your identity and any information by which you might be identified are assured. Comments: Procedure The data is intended to be gathered by survey questionnaire. The questionnaire is to be distributed in hard form as well as through the online facilities in it soft form (i.e., in excel spreadsheet format). The accomplished questionnaires are to be gathered, the data collated and analysed with the use of descriptive statistics in terms of means, percentages, ranking, and standard deviation, and inferential statistics in the form of regression or correlation statistics. Interpretation of the results will be consistent with the 5-point Likert scale with which the responses were designed. Results The dissertation is expected to provide as a result a set of factors which are deemed to be sufficiently present in NPOs, and which are not. It also expected to determine what the resulting levels and types of commitment have been engendered in the NPOs’ work force, and the outcomes that are evident as the fruits of employee engagement. The open invitation at the end of the survey questionnaire, upon which the respondent may freely comment, may provide additional results to support the interpretation of the quantitative findings gathered by the questionnaire. Discussion The discussion shall aim to present a cogent explanation for the relevance of the use of employee engagement in NPOs in terms of organizational and individual factors that combine to create a more comprehensive understanding of employee engagement in NPOs. Preliminary Bibliography Berk, J & Berk, S 2000 Quality Management for the Technology Sector. Butterworth-Heinemann, Woburn, MA Berry, L L 1980 "Service Marketing is Different," Business, (May-June), pp.24-29 Berta, D 2009 “CHART Conference attendees talk training, aid local charity.” Nations Restaurant News, 5/18/2009, Vol. 43 Issue 18, p86 Conger, J A & Kanungo, R N 1988 “The empowerment process; Integrating theory and practice.” The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 28, Issue 3, pp. 471-482 Enz, C A 2010 The Cornell School of Hotel Administration Handbook of Applied Hospitality Strategy. SAGE Publications, Inc. Gill, A; Flaschner, A B.; Shah, C; & Bhutani, I 2010 “The Relations of Transformational Leadership and Empowerment with Employee Job Satisfaction: A Study among Indian Restaurant Employees.” Business & Economics Journal, p1-10 Grigg, A 2010 “Employee empowerment is the main ingredient in a baking companys competitive strategy.” Global Business & Organizational Excellence, Jan/Feb 2010, Vol. 29 Issue 2, p6-18; DOI: 10.1002/joe.20304 Heathfield, S M 2010 Empowerment [Online]. Accessed 5 November 2011 from: http://humanresources.about.com/od/glossarye/a/empowerment_def.htm Hema, N M & Samuel S 2011 “Importance-Performance Analysis to determine Service Quality of a Restaurant Service – an Empirical Study”. Advances in Management. Vol. 4, Issue 2, pp.52 – 57 Hernandez, S R & O’Connor, S J 2010 Strategic Human Resources Management in Health Services Organizations, Third Edition. Delmar Cengage Learning, Clifton Park, NY Hoy, W K 2009 Quantitative Research in Education: A Primer. SAGE Publications, Inc., London Johnson, M 2011 “Workforce Deviance and the Business Case for Employee Engagement.” Journal for Quality & Participation, July, Vol. 34 Issue 2, p11-16 Kesler, G 2011 “What Business Can Learn from the Nonprofit (and Vice-Versa): Drucker Revisited.” People & Strategy, Vol. 34 Issue 3, p40-44 Kotler, P 2003 Marketing Management. Prentice Hall Lashley, C 2001 Empowerment: HR strategies for service excellence. Oxford, Burlington, Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann Lovelock, C 2004 “The Future of Services Marketing: Trick or Treat for Practitioners, Customers, Students, and Academics?” Frontiers in Services Conference. University of Miami, 31 October. Marshall, R; Talbott, J; & Bukovinsky, D 2006 “Employee Empowerment Works at Small Companies, Too.” Strategic Finance, Sep 2006, Vol. 88 Issue 3, p34-39 Markos, S; & Sridevi, M S 2010 “Employee Engagement: The Key to Improving Performance.” International Journal of Business & Management, Dec 2010, Vol. 5 Issue 12, p89-96 Puckett, R P & Byers, B A; & Green, C 2004 Food Service Manual for Health Care Institutions, Third Edition. Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, CA Rashid, H A; Asad, A; Ashraf, M M 2011 “Factors Persuading Employee Engagement and Linkage of EE to Personal & Organizational Performance.” Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, Sep 2011, Vol. 3 Issue 5, p98-108. Robinson D., Perryman S., & Hayday S. 2004 The Drivers of Employee Engagement Report 408, Institute for Employment Studies, UK Sahoo, C K; Behera, N; & Tripathy, S K 2010 “Employee Empowerment and Individual Commitment: An Analysis from Integrative Review of Research,” Employment Relations Record, Vol 10, No. 2, pp. 40-56. Sharma, M K & Kaur, G 2008 “Employee Empowerment: A Conceptual Analysis.” Journal of Global Business Issues, Summer/Fall 2008, Vol. 2 Issue 2, p7-12 Thomas, A B 2004 Research Skills for Management Studies. Routledge, London Thomas, K W & Velthouse, B A 1990 “Cognitive elements of empowerment: An interpretive model of intrinsic task motivation,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 15, Issue 4, pp. 666-681. Vasugi, S P M; Kaviatha, S F; & Prema, R 2011 “An Empirical Investigation On Employee Empowerment Practices In Indian Software Industries.” Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, Mar 2011, Vol. 2 Issue 11, p668-674 Willis, J W; Willis, J; Jost, M; & Nilakanta, R 2007 Foundations of Qualitative Research: Interpretive and Critical Approaches. SAGE Publications, Inc., London Witts, A; Ydreos, L & Poirier, W 2008 “Linking Employee Engagement and Wellbeing with the Bottom Line.” 2008 CPBI Conference – Global Warning. 10 Oct 2008. Towers Perrin. Yukl, G A & Becker, W S 2006 “Effective Empowerment in Organizations.” Organization Management Journal, Vol. 3 Issue 3, p210-231 Read More